Managing Conflict Flashcards
(10 cards)
Negotiation
process in which two or more parties work together to reach agreement on a matter. It involves distinguishing between needs and wants. Needs are essential to a leader’s goals—for example, a budget to conduct a needs analysis preliminary to designing a new policy or process. Wants are attractive but not really essential. For example, it might be nice to have a 20% reserve for the needs analysis project, but a leader can meet the ultimate goal without it or with a smaller reserve.
Soft negotiators
value the relationship more than the outcome and will back down on issues in the interest of reaching agreement—even if they are no longer getting what they need.
Hard negotiators
are committed to winning, even at the cost of the relationship. These negotiators may pursue position-based bargaining, which views negotiation as a zero-sum exercise and relies on parties staking out opposite positions and slowly making concessions until an agreement is made (or negotiations break off entirely).
principled negotiation
the negotiators aim for mutual gain, applying a process developed by Roger Fisher and William Ury called interest-based relational negotiating or integrative bargaining. Fisher and Ury emphasize the need to focus on the problem instead of personal differences and on mutually beneficial outcomes rather than hard positions. Principled negotiators can separate people from positions. They identify common interests and make them a goal of the negotiation. They are also creative: They come to the negotiation prepared with different options that may satisfy both sides. In principled negotiation, the goal is a win-win solution, requiring some sacrifice of position from each side in order to gain meaningful points.
Preparation.
The negotiator should identify critical needs, wants that could be concessions, and possible demands from the other side. An important tactic described by Fisher and Ury is defining your “BATNA”—your best alternative to a negotiated agreement. Knowing your possible alternatives if negotiation fails helps in establishing a more accurate value and creating proposals you can live with. Effective negotiators also try to perform a BATNA analysis for the other side so they can anticipate reactions.
Relationship building.
Trust is built with the exchange of personal information that reveals character. Many negotiating tactics focus on creating an atmosphere that encourages comfort and openness.
Information exchange.
Positions and needs are explained by both sides. A more thorough understanding of positions usually leads to more-balanced agreements. This tactic is referred to as perspective taking—seeing the issue from the other side. In a negotiation, perspective taking helps negotiators anticipate reactions to proposals and overcome negotiating obstacles. Understanding the other side’s constraints and desires can help a negotiator approach the problem from a different angle, expand the options on the table to increase value for the other side, and propose win-win solutions. Making the first offer is usually considered an advantage, since it “anchors” or defines the negotiating point. Unless the first offer is completely unacceptable, it can set a reasonable range for negotiation.
Persuasion.
Negotiators seek mutually beneficial options rather than trying to win the other side to their own position. This is possible since both sides have a broader understanding of each other’s divergent interests and can find solutions that satisfy needs on both sides. Fisher and Ury recommend that negotiators focus on discovering interests rather than staking out—and clinging to—distinct positions. Understanding the other side’s underlying interest can help both sides discover a third way.
Concessions.
Both sides find wants that are not essential to agreement. Some negotiators plan to make small concessions, while others never make concessions—at least formally. In a multi-party negotiation, one can try to get the other participants to bid against each other in the manner of an auction.
Agreement.
Agreements may be legal instruments or verbally expressed understandings. The requirement of a legal contract may itself be offensive to some cultures, who view it as a sign of lack of trust in the relationship. Negotiators must also be alert to agreement that is only apparent and may result from a desire to avoid conflict.
